In this article, we conduct a systematic review of the emerging literature on the biological perspective in management and investigate research spanning the areas of genetics, physiology, and neuroscience. We examine 291 papers published in 133 journals over an 85-year period as well as 10 conference/working papers and six books. On the basis of this analysis, we present an organizing framework of the area, explain the mechanisms through which biological factors relate to management, and discuss the implications of the biological perspective for the theory and the practice of management. Finally, we present an agenda highlighting avenues for future research in this field.

Research Summary: We examine the performance effects of resource orchestration in start-ups by investigating three key contingencies of resource orchestration: human capital (HC) investment relative to rivals, leveraging strategy, and founder start-up experience. We find that deviating from rivals' resource investments (either above or below the industry mean) negatively affects performance, while conforming to the norms set by rivals positively affects performance. However, we also find that a higher investment in HC relative to rivals is less detrimental when aligned with a leveraging strategy focused on innovation. In addition, we find evidence that this relationship is conditioned by the entrepreneurial experience of the founders themselves.Managerial Summary: To create value, entrepreneurs need to assemble and manage various resources and capabilities. We explain how entrepreneurs can manage their resources to achieve higher performance. Using a sample of U.S. start-ups, we find that deviations in human capital (HC) investments relative to rivals (either below or above) harm the performance of start-ups. However, we also find that a higher investment in HC relative to rivals is less detrimental when the start-up is focused on innovation. In addition, we find that experienced founders benefit from actively orchestrating HC investments relative to rivals with a strategy focused on innovation. K E Y W O R D S dynamic managerial capabilities, human capital investment, new ventures, resource orchestration, strategic entrepreneurship

The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP url' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.

Research on family firms provides mixed evidence of the effect of family ownership on firm performance and exit outcomes. Drawing on threshold theory and the socioemotional wealth perspective, we argue that family firms have lower performance thresholds than non-family firms, reducing the likelihood of firm exit. Using a longitudinal dataset of 1191 firms over the period 2008–2011, we find support for this contention, suggesting that performance threshold is an important, yet poorly studied, construct for understanding exits of family versus non-family firms.Plain English Summary Why firms with similar economic performance make different exit decisions? We find evidence that family firms have lower “performance thresholds” than non-family firms, reducing family firms’ likelihood of exit. Using a longitudinal dataset, we examine differences in performance threshold between family and non-family firms and help clarify why some firms persist with their ventures even though their performance may indicate they should exit the market. Our theory and related findings suggest that nonfinancial attributes such as identity, the ability to exercise family influence, and to hand the business down to future generations may affect family firms’ attitudes toward exit decisions. Our study contributes to sharpening our understanding of exit in family firms while motivating future work on exit strategies in family firms and other contexts.

No abstract